| >> |
!!cJ4MGVqvOKw 10/10/11(Mon)20:09 No.30452666
File1318291797.gif-(400 KB, 400x363, legit griffy.gif)
 >>30452301
>>30452431
Don't make me buy my own con, guys. ;_;
>>30452501
I've actually engaged in this discussion before, which is apparently how I met and got to know a great deal of the people who visit these MLP generals.
My personal belief is that the idea of "sexuality", as one of the most important and fundamental life lessons that can possibly be taught to a child, should be broached and taught during the formative years in order to properly engender the development of a tolerant socio-political mindset, you know? The best way to do that is to adopt a normativist stance, rather than a heteronormative or marginalising one - instead of focusing on the idea of "here, there is this, you should treat it as normal and tolerate it", we push the envelope a little and don't call attention to it. For example, in this show, having Lyra and Bon-bon together, if they're shown kissing or something and then that's not addressed - no one looks confused, or disgusted, or so on, for instance - it seems like something that is perfectly acceptable. The viewer comes to believe that, most specifically in the formative years, despite them both being girls, or in an analogous situation, boys. Parents should be doing the same thing. Important life lessons must be taught at an early stage in order to make sure they stick, and they must be provided with strength and discipline on the proviso that they are correct ones to teach - in this case, children's television is the best place to provide these morals, and they shouldn't focus on "acceptance", they should focus on not drawing exclusivist dividing lines.
I'd cite some case studies and shit but fuck that, it's 1 in the morning. Why do we always have these discussions when I'm tired? It may well be an unrealistic expectation, but it certainly warrants consideration in a (fucking postmodernist) contemporary society worth its salt. |
*click*